Re: Pray for Less Stress Among the Super Rich
Only poor people need money. All they can do is buy things. Maybe they could make a stone club and break off a bit of stick to poke things with or fetch out grubs or something. Creative people, those upon whom our society is based, don't need to do that. They invent shopping malls (where poor people can buy things) or nuclear submarines (to defend poor people) but before those things were invented, no poor person had the benefit of either.
It is because the super rich don't need to buy things, because they invent them, that a flow of revenue needs to be sustained for capital investment into inventing more things. Sometimes government investment is needed (agricultural policy, aircraft carriers) for the benefits to flow to those who need them. It's appropriate that net beneficiaries (shinier malls, cheaper food, effective military) contribute through taxation to their improved lifestyle: then they will be less poor.
Actual inventors simply invent the things they require. Sure they could buy things too but that is not the purpose of being super rich. Wealth merely represents the resources needed to invent things. And the more they invent the less poverty-stricken the poor become. Differential asset levels between the two groups may be a handy guide to the effectiveness of such improvement. One way to increase that would be for laws governing the beneficiaries (poor people) to be tailored to the concerns of those lifting nations out of poverty (the super rich) preempting any likely collapse of their resource base. Perhaps enclaves (or exclaves) having distinct laws relating to assets, taxation, health & safety regulations (to name but three) would be appropriate?
This may be a silly idea, but I'll throw it out there, happy to be corrected of course. Seems sound though.
Only poor people need money. All they can do is buy things. Maybe they could make a stone club and break off a bit of stick to poke things with or fetch out grubs or something. Creative people, those upon whom our society is based, don't need to do that. They invent shopping malls (where poor people can buy things) or nuclear submarines (to defend poor people) but before those things were invented, no poor person had the benefit of either.
It is because the super rich don't need to buy things, because they invent them, that a flow of revenue needs to be sustained for capital investment into inventing more things. Sometimes government investment is needed (agricultural policy, aircraft carriers) for the benefits to flow to those who need them. It's appropriate that net beneficiaries (shinier malls, cheaper food, effective military) contribute through taxation to their improved lifestyle: then they will be less poor.
Actual inventors simply invent the things they require. Sure they could buy things too but that is not the purpose of being super rich. Wealth merely represents the resources needed to invent things. And the more they invent the less poverty-stricken the poor become. Differential asset levels between the two groups may be a handy guide to the effectiveness of such improvement. One way to increase that would be for laws governing the beneficiaries (poor people) to be tailored to the concerns of those lifting nations out of poverty (the super rich) preempting any likely collapse of their resource base. Perhaps enclaves (or exclaves) having distinct laws relating to assets, taxation, health & safety regulations (to name but three) would be appropriate?
This may be a silly idea, but I'll throw it out there, happy to be corrected of course. Seems sound though.
Comment